Acceptance of animal research in our science community.
Ontology highlight
ABSTRACT:
SUBMITTER: Bergmeister K
PROVIDER: S-EPMC4866631 | biostudies-literature |
REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature
Similar Datasets
Project description:Animal welfare science features interdisciplinary and collaborative working across fields, spanning behavioural ecology, psychology, veterinary sciences, economics, and fundamental biology. However, education research is not yet prevalent within the animal welfare literature. In a Web of Science topic search there were 188 papers which specifically discussed or explored how to teach animal welfare from 1978 to 2017. Of these, only 34% (n = 61) specifically focused on instructional design or pedagogical research, and these were predominantly within veterinary education (57%). Despite this, the literature is in broad agreement that animal welfare education is an important topic that should be done well. Within the UK, there were a possible 586 animal-related courses within Universities College Admissions Service database for potential students to choose from, highlighting the significance of robust and considered educational practice. The current gaps identified in the literature were discussion of hidden curriculums outside of veterinary degrees, animal-centered education, the blueprinting of assessment, and authentic assessment. Therefore, this review proposes that animal welfare scientists interested in education consider discipline based educational research (DBER) practices, and engage more fully with the educational research literature. A key component of DBER is the recognition that specialist knowledge needs to be taught by specialists, and so it is important that animal welfare scientists begin to access educational research too.
| S-EPMC6997439 | biostudies-literature
Project description:There is long-standing scientific interest in understanding purposeful movement by animals and humans. Traditionally, collecting data on individual moving entities was difficult and time-consuming, limiting scientific progress. The growth of location-aware and other geospatial technologies for capturing, managing and analyzing moving objects data are shattering these limitations, leading to revolutions in animal movement ecology and human mobility science. Despite parallel transitions towards massive individual-level data collected automatically via sensors, there is little scientific cross-fertilization across the animal and human divide. There are potential synergies from converging these separate domains towards an integrated science of movement. This paper discusses the data-driven revolutions in the animal movement ecology and human mobility science, their contrasting worldviews and, as examples of complementarity, transdisciplinary questions that span both fields. We also identify research challenges that should be met to develop an integrated science of movement trajectories.
| S-EPMC7531019 | biostudies-literature
Project description:To advance justice, equity, diversity, and inclusion in science, we must first understand and improve the dominant-culture frameworks that impede progress and, second, we must intentionally create more equitable models. The present authors call ourselves the ICBOs and Allies Workgroup (ICBOs stands for independent community-based organizations), and we represent communities historically excluded from the sciences. Together with institutional allies and advisors, we began our research because we wanted our voices to be heard, and we hoped to bring a different perspective to doing science with and not on communities. We created a community framework to guide our research and we led all aspects of our work, from creating research protocols to analyzing and interpreting the data to disseminating the results. We share our research framework, methods, and results so that science institutions can better understand how to intentionally create more equitable research partnerships with our communities.
| S-EPMC9169893 | biostudies-literature
Project description:The transfer of new discoveries into both clinical practice and the wider community calls for reliance on interdisciplinary translational teams that include researchers with different areas of expertise, representatives of health care systems and community organizations, and patients. Engaging new stakeholders in research, however, calls for a reconsideration or expansion of the meaning of ethics in translational research. We explored expert opinion on the applicability of ethical principles commonly practiced in community-engaged research (CEnR) to translational research. To do so, we conducted 2 online, modified-Delphi panels with 63 expert stakeholders who iteratively rated and discussed 9 ethical principles commonly used in CEnR in terms of their importance and feasibility for use in translational research. The RAND/UCLA appropriateness method was used to analyze the data and determine agreement and disagreement among participating experts. Both panels agreed that ethical translational research should be "grounded in trust." Although the academic panel endorsed "culturally appropriate" and "forthcoming with community about study risks and benefits," the mixed academic-community panel endorsed "scientifically valid" and "ready to involve community in interpretation and dissemination" as important and feasible principles of ethical translational research. These findings suggest that in addition to protecting human subjects, contemporary translational science models need to account for the interests of, and owe ethical obligations to, members of the investigative team and the community at large.
| S-EPMC4833614 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BACKGROUND:The institutions that comprise the Clinical and Translational Science Award (CTSA) consortium and the National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences continue to explore and develop community-engaged research strategies and to study the role of community academic partnerships in advancing the science of community engagement. OBJECTIVES:To explore CTSA institutions in relation to an Institute of Medicine recommendation that community engagement occur in all stages of translational research and be defined and evaluated consistently. METHODS:A sequential multimethods study starting with an online pilot survey followed by survey respondents and site informant interviews. A revised survey was sent to the community engagement and evaluation leads at each CTSA institution, requesting a single institutional response about the definitions, indicators, and metrics of community engagement and community-engaged research. RESULTS:A plurality of CTSA institutions selected the definition of community engagement from the Principles of Community Engagement. Although claiming unique institutional priorities create barriers to developing shared metrics, responses indicate an overall lack of attention to the development and deployment of metrics to assess community engagement in and contributions to research. CONCLUSIONS:Although definitions of community engagement differ among CTSAs, there seem to be more similarities than differences in the indicators and measures tracked and reported on across all definitions, perhaps owing to commonalities among program infrastructures and goals. Metrics will likely need to be specific to translational research stages. The assessment of community engagement within translational science will require increased institutional commitment.
| S-EPMC6237095 | biostudies-literature
Project description:BackgroundAnimal research (AR) findings often do not translate to humans; one potential reason is the poor methodological quality of AR. We aimed to determine this quality of AR reported in critical care journals.MethodsAll AR published from January to June 2012 in three high-impact critical care journals were reviewed. A case report form and instruction manual with clear definitions were created, based on published recommendations, including the ARRIVE guidelines. Data were analyzed with descriptive statistics.ResultsSeventy-seven AR publications were reviewed. Our primary outcome (animal strain, sex, and weight or age described) was reported in 52 (68%; 95% confidence interval, 56% to 77%). Of the 77 publications, 47 (61%) reported randomization; of these, 3 (6%) reported allocation concealment, and 1 (2%) the randomization procedure. Of the 77 publications, 31 (40%) reported some type of blinding; of these, disease induction (2, 7%), intervention (7, 23%), and/or subjective outcomes (17, 55%) were blinded. A sample size calculation was reported in 4/77 (5%). Animal numbers were missing in the Methods section in 16 (21%) publications; when stated, the median was 32 (range 6 to 320; interquartile range, 21 to 70). Extra animals used were mentioned in the Results section in 31 (40%) publications; this number was unclear in 23 (74%), and >100 for 12 (16%). When reporting most outcomes, numbers with denominators were given in 35 (45%), with no unaccounted numbers in 24 (31%), and no animals excluded from analysis in 20 (26%). Most (49, 64%) studies reported >40, and another 19 (25%) reported 21 to 40 statistical comparisons. Internal validity limitations were discussed in 7 (9%), and external validity (to humans) discussed in 71 (92%), most with no (30, 42%) or only a vague (9, 13%) limitation to this external validity mentioned.ConclusionsThe reported methodological quality of AR was poor. Unless the quality of AR significantly improves, the practice may be in serious jeopardy of losing public support.
| S-EPMC4126494 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Partnered research may help bridge the gap between research and practice. Community-based participatory research (CBPR) supports collaboration between scientific researchers and community members that is designed to improve capacity, enhance trust, and address health disparities. Systems science aims to understand the complex ways human-ecological coupled systems interact and apply knowledge to management practices. Although CBPR and systems science display complementary principles, only a few articles describe synergies between these 2 approaches. In this article, we explore opportunities to utilize concepts from systems science to understand the development, evolution, and sustainability of 1 CBPR partnership: The Community Health Advocacy and Research Alliance (CHARA). Systems science tools may help CHARA and other CBPR partnerships sustain their core identities while co-evolving in conjunction with individual members, community priorities, and a changing healthcare landscape. Our goal is to highlight CHARA as a case for applying the complementary approaches of CBPR and systems science to (1) improve academic/community partnership functioning and sustainability, (2) ensure that research addresses the priorities and needs of end users, and (3) support more timely application of scientific discoveries into routine practice.
| S-EPMC6390389 | biostudies-literature
Project description:This study assesses the impacts of the Science program at Piedmont Virginia Community College and its flagship capstone research experience, Supervised Study, through psychosocial perceptions associated with persistence in science and through a comparative analysis of subsequent science bachelor's degree attainment. Supervised Study involves authentic, independent projects, a research methods course and learning community, and one-on-one faculty mentoring. The Persistence in the Sciences survey was used as a repeated-measures instrument in four semesters of Supervised Study. Positive trends were observed for self-efficacy, science identity, community values, and networking, while responses related to project ownership were mixed (n = 13). To contextualize these observations, transfer and bachelor's degree completion rates were analyzed. Students who earn an associate's degree in Science (n = 113 between 2012 and 2019) complete bachelor's degrees at high rates (66.4%). Moreover, they are two to four times more likely to major in physical and natural sciences than their science-oriented peers, who take many of the same courses, with the exception of Supervised Study. Notably, these comparison rates remain consistent between different demographic groups. These findings further describe a model for research at the community college level that supports persistence in undergraduate science for a broad group of students.
| S-EPMC9582823 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Improving laboratory animal science and welfare requires both new scientific research and insights from research in the humanities and social sciences. Whilst scientific research provides evidence to replace, reduce and refine procedures involving laboratory animals (the '3Rs'), work in the humanities and social sciences can help understand the social, economic and cultural processes that enhance or impede humane ways of knowing and working with laboratory animals. However, communication across these disciplinary perspectives is currently limited, and they design research programmes, generate results, engage users, and seek to influence policy in different ways. To facilitate dialogue and future research at this interface, we convened an interdisciplinary group of 45 life scientists, social scientists, humanities scholars, non-governmental organisations and policy-makers to generate a collaborative research agenda. This drew on methods employed by other agenda-setting exercises in science policy, using a collaborative and deliberative approach for the identification of research priorities. Participants were recruited from across the community, invited to submit research questions and vote on their priorities. They then met at an interactive workshop in the UK, discussed all 136 questions submitted, and collectively defined the 30 most important issues for the group. The output is a collaborative future agenda for research in the humanities and social sciences on laboratory animal science and welfare. The questions indicate a demand for new research in the humanities and social sciences to inform emerging discussions and priorities on the governance and practice of laboratory animal research, including on issues around: international harmonisation, openness and public engagement, 'cultures of care', harm-benefit analysis and the future of the 3Rs. The process outlined below underlines the value of interdisciplinary exchange for improving communication across different research cultures and identifies ways of enhancing the effectiveness of future research at the interface between the humanities, social sciences, science and science policy.
| S-EPMC4948886 | biostudies-literature
Project description:Abstract Human‐centered, active‐learning approaches can help students develop core competencies in biology and other STEM fields, including the ability to conduct research, use quantitative reasoning, communicate across disciplinary boundaries, and connect science education to pressing social and environmental challenges. Promising approaches for incorporating active learning into biology courses include the use of course‐based research, community engagement, and international experiences. Disruption to higher education due to the COVID‐19 pandemic made each of these approaches more challenging or impossible to execute. Here, we describe a scalable course‐based undergraduate research experience (CURE) for an animal behavior course that integrates research and community engagement in a remote international experience. Students in courses at two U.S. universities worked with community partners to analyze the behavior of African goats grazing near informal settlements in Western Cape, South Africa. Partners established a relationship with goat herders, and then created 2‐min videos of individual goats that differed in criteria (goat sex and time of day) specified by students. Students worked in small groups to choose dependent variables, and then compared goat behavior across criteria using a factorial design. In postcourse surveys, students from both universities indicated overall enthusiasm for the experience. In general, students indicated that the laboratory provided them with “somewhat more” of a research‐based experience compared with biology laboratories they had taken of similar length, and “somewhat more” to “much more” of a community‐engagement and international experience. Educational benefits were complemented by the fact that international educational partners facing economic hardship due to the pandemic received payment for services. Future iterations of the CURE can focus on goat behavior differences across ecological conditions to help herders increase production in the face of continued environmental and social challenges. More generally, applying the structure of this CURE could facilitate mutually beneficial collaborations with residents of under‐resourced areas around the world. Course‐based research, community engagement, and international experiences can enhance undergraduate biology education, but each were made more challenging due to the COVID‐19 pandemic. Here, we describe a scalable course‐based undergraduate research experience focusing on African goat behavior that integrates research and community engagement in a remote international experience. Educational benefits for students were complemented by the fact that international educational partners facing economic hardship due to the pandemic could receive payment for services.
| S-EPMC9831970 | biostudies-literature